Russia: News/Analysis/Discussion

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Post Reply
Avarachan
BRFite
Posts: 567
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 21:06

Russia: News/Analysis/Discussion

Post by Avarachan »

I've noticed that while BR has many threads devoted to the U.S., China, and Pakistan, we don't have a place to examine internal developments within Russia (regarding politics, economics, etc.). I would like this thread to be the place for that.
Avarachan
BRFite
Posts: 567
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 21:06

Re: Russia: News/Analysis/Discussion

Post by Avarachan »

Saker allows the re-posting of his articles.
_________________________

"Putin’s biggest failure"

January 24, 2016
http://thesaker.is/putins-biggest-failure/

Whatever happens in the future, Putin has already secured his place in history as one of the greatest Russian leaders ever. Not only did he succeed in literally resurrecting Russia as a country, but in a little over a decade he brought her back as a world power capable of successfully challenging the AngloZionist Empire. The Russian people have clearly recognized this feat and, according to numerous polls, they are giving him an amazing 90% support rate. And yet, there is one crucial problem which Putin has failed to tackle: the real reason behind the apparent inability of the Kremlin to meaningfully reform the Russian economy.

As I have described it in the past many times, when Putin came to power in 1999-2000 he inherited a system completely designed and controlled by the USA. During the Eltsin years, Russian ministers had much less power than western ‘advisers’ who turned Russia into a US colony. In fact, during the 1990s, Russia was at least as controlled by the USA as Europe and the Ukraine are today. And the results were truly catastrophic: Russia was plundered from her natural wealth, billions of dollars were stolen and hidden in western offshore accounts, the Russian industry was destroyed, a unprecedented wave of violence, corruption and poverty drowned the entire country in misery and the Russian Federation almost broke up into many small statelets. It was, by any measure, an absolute nightmare, a horror comparable to a major war. Russia was about to explode and something had to be done.

Two remaining centers of power, the oligarchs and the ex-KGB, were forced to seek a solution to this crisis and they came up with the idea of sharing power: the former would be represented by Dmitrii Medvedev and the latter by Vladimir Putin. Both sides believed that they would keep the other side in check and that this combination of big money and big muscle would yield a sufficient degree of stability.

I call the group behind Medvedev the “Atlantic Integrationists” and the people behind Putin the “Eurasian Sovereignists”. The former wants Russia to be accepted by the West as an equal partner and fully integration Russia into the AngloZionist Empire, while the latter want to fully “sovereignize” Russia and then create a multi-polar international system with the help of China and the other BRICS countries.

What the Atlantic Integrationists did not expect is that Putin would slowly but surely begin to squeeze them out of power: first he cracked down on the most notorious oligarchs such as Berezovskii and Khodorkovskii, then he began cracking down on the local oligarchs, gubernatorial mafias, ethnic mobsters, corrupt industry officials, etc. Putin restored the “vertical [axis]of power” and crushed the Wahabi insurgents in Chechnia. Putin even carefully set up the circumstances needed to get rid of some of the worst ministers such as Serdiukov and Kudrin. But what Putin has so far failed to do is to

Reform the Russian political system
Replace the 5th columnists in and around the Kremlin
Reform the Russian economy

The current Russian Constitution and system of government is a pure product of the US ‘advisors’ which, after the bloody crackdown against the opposition in 1993, allowed Boris Eltsin to run the country until 1999. It is paradoxical that the West now speaks of a despotic presidency about Putin when all he did is inherit a western-designed political system. The problem for Putin today is that it makes no sense to replace some of the worst people in power as long as the system remains unchanged. But the main obstacle to a reform of the political system is the resistance of the pro-Western 5th columnists in and around the Kremlin. They also the ones who are still forcing a set of “Washington consensus” kind of policies upon Russia even though it is obvious that the consequences for Russia are extremely bad, even disastrous. There is no doubt that Putin understands that, but he has been unable, at least so far, to break out of this dynamic.

So who are these 5th columnists?

I have selected nine of the names most often mentioned by Russian analysts. These are (in no particular order):

Former First Deputy Prime Minister Anatolii Chubais, First Deputy Governor of the Russian Central Bank Ksenia Iudaeva, Deputy Prime Minister Arkadii Dvorkovich, First Deputy Prime Minister Igor Shuvalov, Governor of the Russian Central Bank Elvira Nabiullina, former Minister of Finance Alexei Kudrin, Minister of Economic Development, Alexei Uliukaev, Minister of Finance Anton Siluanov and Prime Minister Dmitri Medvedev.

The 5th column in the Kremlin
The Russian 5th column: Chubais, Iudaeva, Dvorkovich, Shuvalov, Nabiullina, Kudrin, Uliukaev, Siluanov, Medvedev

This is, of course, only a partial list – the real list is longer and runs deeper in the Russian power structure. The people on this list range from dangerous ideologues like Kudrin or Chubais, to mediocre and unimaginative people, like Siluanov or Nabiullina. And none of them would, by him or herself, represent much of a threat to Putin. But as a group and in the current political system they are a formidable foe which has kept Putin in check. I do believe, however, that a purge is being prepared.

One of the possible signs of a purge to come is the fact that the Russian media, both the blogosphere and the big corporate media, is now very critical of the economic policies of the government of Prime Minister Medvedev. Most Russian economists agree that the real reason for the current economic crisis in Russia is not the falling price of oil or, even less so, the western sanctions, but the misguided decisions of the Russian Central Bank (such as floating the Ruble or keeping the interest rates high) and the lack of governmental action to support a real reform and development of the Russian economy. What is especially interesting is that vocal opponents of the current 5th column now get plenty of air time in the Russian media, including state owned VGTRK. Leading opponents of the current economic policies, such as Sergei Glazev, Mikhail Deliagin or Mikhail Khazin are now interviewed at length and given all the time needed to absolutely blast the economic policies of the Medvedev government. And yet, Putin is still taking no visible action. In fact, in his latest yearly address he as even praised the work of the Russian Central Bank. So what is going on here?

First, and to those exposed to the western propaganda, this might be difficult to imagine, but Putin is constrained simply by the rule of law. He cannot just send some special forces and have all these folks arrested on some kind of charge of corruption, malfeasance or sabotage. Many in Russia very much regret that, but this is fact of life.

In theory, Putin could simply fire the entire (or part) of the government and appoint a different Governor to the Central Bank. But the problem with that is that it would trigger an extremely violent reaction from the West. Mikhail Deliagin recently declared that if Putin did this, the West’s reaction would be even more violent than after the Crimean reunification with Russia. Is he right? Maybe. But I personally believe that Putin is not only concerned about the reaction of the West, but also from the Russian elites, particularly those well off, who generally already intensely dislike Putin and who would see such a purge as an attack on their personal and vital interests. The combination of US subversion and local big money definitely has the ability to create some kind of crisis in Russia. This is, I think, by far the biggest threat Putin his facing. But here is also can observe a paradoxical dynamic:

One one hand, Russia and the West have been in an open confrontation ever since Russian prevented the USA from attacking Syria. The Ukrainian crisis only made things worse. Add to this the dropped prices on oil and the western sanctions and you could say that Putin now, more then ever, needs to avoid anything which could make the crisis even worse.

But on the other hand, this argument can be flipped around by saying that considering how bad the tensions already are and considering that the West has already done all it can to harm Russia, is this not the perfect time to finally clean house and get right of the 5th column? Really – how much worse can things really get?

Only Putin knows the answer to this simply because only he has all the facts. All we can do is observe that the popular discontent with the “economic block” of the government and with the Central Bank is most definitely growing and growing fast, and that the Kremlin is doing nothing to inhibit or suppress such feelings. We can also notice that while most Russians are angry, disgusted and frustrated with the economic policies of the Medvedev government, Putin’s personal popularity is still sky high in spite of the fact that the Russian economy most definitely took a hit, even if it was much smaller than what the AngloZionist Empire had hoped for.

My strictly personal explanation for what is happening is this: Putin is deliberately letting things get worse because he knows that the popular anger will not be directed at him, but only at his enemies. Think of it, is that not exactly what the Russian security services did in the 1990s? Did they not allow the crisis in Russia to reach its paroxysm before pushing Putin into power and then ruthlessly cracking down on the oligarchs? Did Putin not wait until the Wahabis in Chechnia actually attacked Dagestan before unleashing the Russian military? Did the Russians not let Saakashvili attack South Ossetia before basically destroying his entire military? Did Putin now wait until a full-scale Ukronazi attack on the Donbass before opening up the “voentorg” (military supplies) and the “northern wind” (dispatch of volunteers) spigots? Putin’s critiques would say that no, not at all, Putin got surprised, he was sleeping on the job, and he had to react, but his reaction was too little too late and that when he had to take action it was only to fix a situation which had turned into a disaster. My answer to these critiques is simple: so what happened at the end? Did Putin not get exactly what he wanted each time?

I believe that Putin is acutely aware that his real power basis is not primarily the Russian military or the security services, but the Russian people. This, in turn, means that for him to take any action, especially any dangerous action, he must secure an almost unconditional level of support from the Russian people. That, in turn, means that he can only take such risky action if and when the crisis is evident for all to see and that the Russian people are willing to have him take a risk and, if needed, pay the consequences. This is exactly what we saw in the case of the reunification of Crimea or the current Russian military intervention in Syria: the Russian people are concerned, they are suffering the consequences of the decision of Putin to take action, but they accept it because they believe that there is no other option.

So there you have it. Either Putin is sleeping on the job, is caught off-guard by each crisis and reacts too late, or Putin deliberately lets a situation worsen until a full-scale crisis is evident at which point he acts with the full knowledge that the Russian people fully support him and while blame him neither for the crisis, nor for the price of decidedly dealing with you.

Pick the version which seems more plausible to you.

What is certain is that so far Putin has failed to deal with the 5th column near and inside the Kremlin and that the situation is rapidly worsening. The recent move by Kudrin to try to get back into the government was a rather transparent use of the pro-5th column media in Russia (and abroad) and it predictably failed. But this shows an increasing self-confidence, or even arrogance, of the Atlantic Integrationists. Something in bound to happen, probably in the near future.

The Saker
member_29294
BRFite
Posts: 131
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Russia: News/Analysis/Discussion

Post by member_29294 »

Avarachan wrote:Saker allows the re-posting of his articles.

So there you have it. Either Putin is sleeping on the job, is caught off-guard by each crisis and reacts too late, or Putin deliberately lets a situation worsen until a full-scale crisis is evident at which point he acts with the full knowledge that the Russian people fully support him and while blame him neither for the crisis, nor for the price of decidedly dealing with you.

Pick the version which seems more plausible to you.
Putin made a mistake with letting the country's economy and government revenue get so dependent on oil. He let Russia suffer from Dutch disease and an over-investment into oil and natural gas. The problem isn't the floating ruble or high interest rates of the Central Bank (although those are the easiest for populists to blame), the problem is that oil revenues make up 44% of all government revenue, which is up from 30% when Putin stepped into office.

What is resulting now is hopefully shock-therapy for the government and economy to move away from excessive fossil fuel dependence. Because now with the Iranians, Saudis, and Iraqis stepping up production with no end in sight I really don't see the price of oil ever rising up to the high levels we have seen in the past.
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21233
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Russia: News/Analysis/Discussion

Post by Prem »

Interesting Change from Being Soviet Kids to Putin's Russia children.

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/arti ... 59233.html
Russian Women — They're Just Not That Into You
Tatyana, a good-looking blonde, leans across the table. "You fancy sticking around for a drink?" she asks with a naughty smile. The subject of her advances, a British Moscow Times business reporter, blushes with embarrassment.It is Saturday evening and we are nearing the end of a foreign-friendly speed dating session in a central Moscow restaurant. Roughly twenty men and women have paid 1,500 rubles ($19) to meet a potential new love interest.Even though only two expats are in attendance, organizers clearly think the "foreign" tag is a crowd puller. Russia is entering its second year of crisis, widening the lifestyle gap between Westerners and Russians.The economic slump has had an impact on the supply side too, as foreigners leave the capital in droves.All of this should be good news for expats' love lives. But the fascination with foreignness is, it appears, skin deep. Moscow today, with its hip cafes, shiny business centers and fashionable retail stores, is no longer the Moscow of the '90s, when girls fantasized about being whisked away by a foreign prince in Levi's.
American Joy
When Russia plunged into chaos following the collapse of the Soviet Union, many of its citizens looked for a reliable way out. Naturally, foreigners were viewed as a bridge to the more developed and "civilized" West.The popular rock group Kombinatsiya summed up in endearing, if flawed, English what was most on Russian girls' minds:
"American boy, American joy.
American boy for always time.
I will go home with you.Moscow bye-bye!"
Russian women gained a name for going weak in the knees for anyone from the West. That reputation persists today, and it is not wholly without cause. Most male expats say that their nationality can still have a positive impact on girls."You can just speak English and heads will turn," said Sean, 26, an English language teacher. Russian women are also more forward, he says: "You can just be talking to someone and some beautiful girl will come up to you with a chat-up line. Back at home, the guy would have to have to make the first move."Not every Russian woman has access to expat hangout spots, though, giving rise to a booming business of dating agencies that specialize in foreign men.Type the Russian words for "get married" or "meet" and "foreigner" into Yandex — the Russian equivalent for Google — and a door opens. This is a world of dating agencies, psychologists, therapists, etiquette training and self-help courses, all geared towards the question of where to meet and how to keep foreign lovers.
Sixteen percent of all marriages registered in Moscow in the first ten months of 2015, were mixed, according to data from the state registry office. The most popular source countries were Ukraine, Turkey, Moldova and CIS countries, followed by Germany, Afghanistan and Israel. Britain and the United States also featured on the list.In a poll conducted in 2009 by Superjob.ru, one in four women aged 55 or older said she wanted a foreign husband. In the age group ten years below that, only 9 percent wanted a foreigner. And the number continued to drop to 6 percent among those aged 25 or younger.As the economic motivation to search for a partner abroad has weakened, most of the reasons for looking beyond Russia's borders are cultural, says dating coach and English teacher Svetlana Tolstykh, 40.But among younger Russian women, who did not experience life under the Soviet Union and are too young to be scarred by past experiences, foreign men have less cachet.During the speed dating session, most women told the Moscow Times reporter that dating a Russian man would be easier and cause less friction. Tolstykh said that more travel experience meant the younger generation of Russian women no longer viewed foreigners through "rose-colored glasses."Terror stories about women who have moved abroad have helped to paint a less rosy picture of mixed marriages. The popular state television program "Let Them Talk" recently covered in detail a story of a Russian woman who moved to Norway and was then beaten to death by her Norwegian husband.
As relations between Russia and the West have soured over the Ukraine crisis, the image of Europe as a beacon of stability has also suffered, with the Greek economic troubles and Syrian migrant crisis receiving broad coverage."Who wants to go to Europe anyway, with all the chaos that's going on there?" said Tatyana at the speed dating session.A floundering ruble is not likely to be enough to change that trend, suggested dating coach Ponomaryova. Indeed, in her view, the economic crisis has made Moscow women want to stick with the familiar."It's better to wed one of your own, than an overseas prince. Life is not as scary," said one respondent in a poll conducted by the Superjob.ru website.Dating coach Tolstykh expects that the niche of women expressly looking for foreigners will become smaller as a new generation of Russian men adopt more emancipated views on relationships.Her own daughter returned to Moscow at age 20 after several years in Ireland, only to get married to a local Muscovite.Tolstykh predicted that in several decades the services offered by dating business like hers would have to be renamed from "find a foreign husband" to "find love" — in the footsteps of their Western counterparts.
chanakyaa
BRFite
Posts: 1723
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 00:09
Location: Hiding in Karakoram

Re: Russia: News/Analysis/Discussion

Post by chanakyaa »

As the oil prices are systematically brought down fall from $90s to $30s (and Low $20s projections in the 2nd and 3rd quarter of 2016), the shortfall in revenues may have some impact on legislative elections in 2016 and presidential elections in 2018. Are the the prices being manipulated with the intention to inspire color revo-loo-sions?

The Effects of Lower Oil Prices

Recession, retrenchment, revolution? Impact of low crude prices on oil powers
Avarachan
BRFite
Posts: 567
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 21:06

Re: Russia: News/Analysis/Discussion

Post by Avarachan »

http://thesaker.is/how-russia-is-preparing-for-wwiii/

FYI, Saker's article has a number of linked videos/photos I don't have time to copy over.
This article was written for the Unz Review: http://www.unz.com/tsaker/how-russia-is ... for-wwiii/

"How Russia is preparing for WWIII," May 26, 2016

I have recently posted a piece in which I tried to debunk a few popular myths about modern warfare. Judging by many comments which I received in response to this post, I have to say that the myths in question are still alive and well and that I clearly failed to convince many readers. What I propose to do today, is to look at what Russia is really doing in response to the growing threat from the West. But first, I have to set the context or, more accurately, re-set the context in which Russia is operating. Let’s begin by looking at the AngloZionist policies towards Russia.

The West’s actions:

First on this list is, obviously, the conquest by NATO of all of Eastern Europe. I speak of conquest because that is exactly what it is, but a conquest achieved according to the rules of 21st century warfare which I define as “80% informational, 15% economic and 5% military”. Yes, I know, the good folks of Eastern Europe were just dreaming of being subjugated by the US/NATO/EU/etc – but so what? Anyone who has read Sun Tzu will immediately recognize that this deep desire to be ‘incorporated’ into the AngloZionist “Borg” is nothing else but the result of a crushed self-identity, a deep-seated inferiority complex and, thus, a surrender which did not even have to be induced by military means. At the end of the day, it makes no difference what the locals thought they were achieving – they are now subjects of the Empire and their countries more or less irrelevant colonies in the fringe of the AngloZionist Empire. As always, the local comprador elite is now bubbling with pride at being, or so they think, accepted as equals by their new masters (think Poroshenko, Tusk or Grybauskaite) which gives them the courage to bark at Moscow from behind the NATO fence. Good for them.

Second is the now total colonization of Western Europe into the Empire. While NATO moved to the East, the US also took much deeper control of Western Europe which is now administered for the Empire by what the former Mayor of London once called the “great supine protoplasmic invertebrate jellies” – faceless bureaucrats à la François Hollande or Angela Merkel.

Third, the Empire has given its total support to semi-demonic creatures ranging from al-Khattab to Nadezhda Savchenko. The West’s policy is crystal clear and simple to the extreme: if it is anti-Russian we back it. This policy is best exemplified with a Putin and Russia demonization campaign which is, in my opinion, far worse and much more hysterical than anything during the Cold War.

Fourth, the West has made a number of highly disturbing military moves including the deployment of the first elements of an anti-missile system in Eastern Europe, the dispatching of various forms of rapid reaction forces, the deployment of a few armored units, etc. NATO now has forward deployed command posts which can be used to support the engagement of a rapid reaction force.

What does all this add up to?

Right now, nothing much, really. Yes, the NATO move right up to the Russian borders is highly provocative, but primarily in political terms. In purely military terms, not only is this a very bad idea (see cliché #6 here), but the size of the actual forces deployed is, in reality, tiny: the ABM system currently deployed can, at best, hope to intercept a few missiles (10-20 depending on your assumptions) as for the conventional forces they are of the battalion size (more or less 600 soldiers plus support). So right now there is categorically no real military threat to Russia.

So why are the Russians so clearly upset?

Because the current US/NATO moves might well be just the first steps of a much larger effort which, given enough time, might begin presenting a very real danger for Russia.

Furthermore, the kind of rhetoric coming out of the West now is not only militaristic and russophobic, it is often outright messianic. The last time around the West had a flare up of its 1000 year old chronic “messianic syndrome” condition Russia lost 20 (to 30) million people. So the Russians can be forgiven if they are paying a great deal of attention to what the AngloZionist propaganda actually says about them.

The Russians are most dismayed at the re-colonization of western Europe. Long gone are the days when people like Charles de Gaulle, Helmut Schmidt or François Mitterrand, were in charge of Europe’s future. For all their very real faults, these men were at least real patriots and not just US colonial administrators. The ‘loss’ of Western Europe is far more concerning for the Russians than the fact that ex-Soviet colonies in Eastern Europe are now under US colonial administration. Why?

Look at this from the Russian point of view.

The Russians all see that the US power is on the decline and that the dollar will, sooner or later, gradually or suddenly, lose its role as the main reserve and exchange currency on the planet (this process has already begun). Simply put – unless the US finds a way to dramatically change the current international dynamic the AngloZionist Empire will collapse. The Russians believe that what the Americans are doing is, at best, to use tensions with Russia to revive a dormant Cold War v2 and, at worst, to actually start a real shooting war in Europe.

So a declining Empire with a vital need for a major crisis, a spineless Western Europe unable to stand up for its own interest, a subservient Eastern Europe just begging to turn into a massive battlefield between East and West, and a messianic, rabidly russophobic rhetoric as the background for an increase in military deployments on the Russian border. Is anybody really surprised that the Russians are taking all this very, very serious even if right now the military threat is basically non-existent?

The Russian reaction

So let us now examine the Russian reaction to Empire’s stance.

First, the Russians want to make darn sure that the Americans do not give in into the illusion that a full-scale war in Europe would be like WWII which saw the US homeland only suffer a few, tiny, almost symbolic, attacks by the enemy. Since a full scale war in Europe would threaten the very existence of the Russian state and nation, the Russians are now taking measures to make darn sure that, should that happen, the US would pay an immense price for such an attack.

Second, the Russians are now evidently assuming that a conventional threat from the West might materialize in the foreseeable future. They are therefore taking the measures needed to counter that conventional threat.

Third, since the USA appears to be dead set into deploying an anti-ballistic missile system not only in Europe, but also in the Far East, the Russians are taking the measures to both defeat and bypass this system.

The Russian effort is a vast and a complex one, and it covers almost every aspect of Russian force planing, but there are four examples which, I think, best illustrate the Russian determination not to allow a 22 June 1941 to happen again:

The re-creation of the First Guards Tank Army (in progress)
The deployment of the Iskander-M operational-tactical missile system (done)
The deployment of the Sarmat ICBM (in progress)
The deployment of the Status-6 strategic torpedo (in progress)
The re-creation of the First Guards Tank Army

It is hard to believe, but the fact is that between 1991 and 2016 Russia did not have a single large formation (division size and bigger) in its Western Military District. A few brigades, regiments and battalions which nominally were called an “Army”. To put it simply – Russia clearly did not believe that there was a conventional military threat from the West and therefore she did not even bother deploying any kind of meaningful military force to defend from such a non-existing threat. By the way, that fact should also tell you everything you need to know about Russian plans to invade the Ukraine, Poland or the Baltics: this is utter nonsense. This has now dramatically changed.

Russia has officially announced that the First Guards Tank Army (a formation with a prestigious and very symbolic history). This Guards Tank Army will now include the 4th “Kantemirov” Guards Tank Division, the 2nd “Taman” Guards Motorized Rifle Division, the 6th Tank Brigade, the 27th Guards Motor Rifle Brigade Sevastopol and many support units. This Army’s HQ will be located in the Odinstovo suburb of Moscow. Currently the Army is equipped with T-72B3 and T-80 main battle tanks, but they will be replaced by the brand new and revolutionary T-14 Armata tank while the current infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers will be replaced by the new APC and IFV. In the air, these armored units will be protected and supported by Mi-28 and Ka-52 attack helicopters. Make no mistake, this will be a very large force, exactly the kind of force needed so smash through an attacking enemy forces (by the way, the 1TGA was present at the Kursk battle). I am pretty sure that by the time the 1TGA is fully organized it will become the most powerful armored formation anywhere between the Atlantic and the Urals (especially in qualitative terms). If the current tensions continue or even worsen, the Russians could even augment the 1TGA to a type of 21st century “Shock Army” with increased mobility and specializing in breaking deep into the enemy’s defenses.

The deployment of the Iskander-M operational-tactical missile system

The new Iskander-M operational tactical missile system is a formidable weapon by any standard. While technically it is a short-range tactical missile (under 1000km range, the Iskander-M has an official range of 500km), it can also fire the R-500 missile has the capability of striking at an intermediate/operational range (over 1000km, the R-500 has a range of 2000km). It is extremely accurate, it has advanced anti-ABM capabilities, it flies at hypersonic speeds and is practically undetectable on the ground (see here for more details). This will be the missile tasked with destroying all the units and equipment the US and NATO have forward-deployed in Eastern Europe and, if needed, clear the way for the 1TGA.

The deployment of the Sarmat ICBM

Neither the 1TGA nor the Iskander-M missile will threaten the US homeland in any way. Russia thus needed some kind of weapon which would truly strike fear into the Pentagon and White House in the way the famous RS-36 Voevoda (aka SS-18 “Satan” in US classification) did during the Cold War. The SS-18, the most powerful ICBM ever developed, was scary enough. The RS-28 “Sarmat” (SS-X-30 by NATO classification) brings the terror to a totally new level.

The Sarmat is nothing short of amazing. It will be capable of carrying 10-15 MIRVed warheads which will be delivered in a so-called “depressed” (suborbital) trajectory and which will remain maneuverable at hypersonic speeds. The missile will not have to use the typical trajectory over the North Pole but will be capable of reaching any target anywhere on the planet from any trajectory. All these elements combined will make the Sarmat itself and its warheads completely impossible to intercept.

The Sarmat will also be capable of delivering conventional Iu-71 hypersonic warheads capable of a “kinetic strike” which could be used to strike a fortified enemy target in a non-nuclear conflict. This will be made possible by the amazing accuracy of the Sarmat’s warheads which, courtesy of a recent Russian leak, we now know have a CEP of 10 meters (see screen capture)

Sarmat MIRV CEPThe Sarmat’s silos will be protected by a unique “active protection measures” which will include 100 guns capable of firing a “metallic cloud” of forty thousand 30mm “bullets” to an altitude of up to 6km. The Russians are also planning to protect the Sarmat with their new S-500 air defense systems. Finally, the Sarmat’s preparation to start time will be under 60 seconds thanks a a highly automated launch system. What this all means is that the Sarmat missile will be invulnerable in its silo, during it’s flight and on re-entry in the lower parts of the atmosphere.

It is interesting to note that while the USA has made a great deal of noise around its planned Prompt Global Strike system, the Russians have already begun deploying their own version of this concept.

The deployment of the Status-6 strategic torpedo

Do you remember the carefully staged “leak” in November of last year when the Russians ‘inadvertently’ showed a super dooper secret strategic torpedo on prime time news? Here is this (in)famous slide:

Status6-2015

What is shown here is an “autonomous underwater vehicle” which has advanced navigational capabilities but which can also be remote controlled and steered from a specialized command module. This vehicle can dive as deep as 1000m, at a speed up to 185km/h and it has a range of up to 10’000km. It is delivered by specially configured submarines.

The Status-6 system can be used to target aircraft carrier battle groups, US navy bases (especially SSBN bases) and, in its most frighting configuration, it can be used to deliver high-radioactivity cobalt bombs capable of laying waste to huge expanses of land. The Status-6 delivery system would be a new version of the T-15 torpedo which would be 24m long, 1,5m wide weigh 40 tons and capable of delivering a 100 megaton warhead which would make it twice as powerful as the most powerful nuclear device ever detonated, the Soviet Czar-bomb (57 megatons). Hiroshima was only 15 kilotons.

Keep in mind that most of the USA’s cities and industrial centers are all along the coastline which makes them extremely vulnerable to torpedo based attacks (be it Sakharov’s proposed “Tsunami bomb” or the Status-6 system). And, just as in the case of the Iskander-M or the Sarmat ICBM, the depth and speed of the Status-6 torpedo would make it basically invulnerable to incerception.

Evaluation:

There is really nothing new in all of the above, and US military commanders have always known that. All the US anti-ballistic missile systems have always been primarily a financial scam, from Reagan’s “Star Wars” to Obama’s “anti-Iranian ABM”. For one thing, any ABM system is susceptible to ‘local saturation': if you have X number ABM missile protecting a Y long space against an X number of missiles, all that you need to do is to saturate only one sector of the Y space with *a lot* of real and fake missiles by firing them all together through one small sector of the Y space the ABM missile system is protecting. And there are plenty of other measures the Russians could take. They could put just one single SLBM capable submarine in Lake Baikal making it basically invulnerable. There is already some discussion of that idea in Russia. Another very good option would be to re-activate the Soviet BzhRK rail-mobile ICBM. Good luck finding them in the immense Russian train network. In fact, the Russians have plenty of cheap and effective measure. Want me to list one more?

Sure!

Take the Kalibr cruise-missile recently seen in the war in Syria. Did you know that it can be shot from a typical commerical container, like the ones you will find on trucks, trains or ships? Check out this excellent video which explains this:



Just remember that the Kalibr has a range of anywhere between 50km to 4000km and that it can carry a nuclear warhead. How hard would it be for Russia to deploy these cruise missiles right off the US coast in regular container ships? Or just keep a few containers in Cuba or Venezuela? This is a system which is so undetectable that the Russians could deploy it off the coast of Australia to hit the NSA station in Alice Springs if they wanted, an nobody would even see it coming.

The reality is that the notion that the US could trigger a war against Russia (or China for that matter) and not suffer the consequences on the US mainland is absolutely ridiculous. And yet, when I hear all the crazy talk by western politicians and generals I get the impression that they are forgetting about this undeniable fact. Frankly, even the current threats against Russia have a ‘half-backed’ feel to them: a battalion here, another one there, a few missiles here, a few more there. It is like the rulers of the Empire don’t realize that it is a very, very bad idea to constantly poke a bear when all you are carrying with you is a pocket-knife. Sometimes the reaction of western politicians remind me of the thugs who try to rob a gas station with a plastic or empty gun and who are absolutely stunned with they get gunned down by the owner or the cops. This kind of thuggery is nothing more than a form of “suicide by cop” which never ends well for the one trying to get away with it.

So sometimes things have to be said directly and unambiguously: western politicians better not believe in their own imperial hubris. So far, all their threats have achieved is that the Russians have responded with a many but futile verbal protests and a full-scale program to prepare Russia for WWIII.

As I have written many times, Russians are very afraid of war and they will go out of their way to avoid it. But they are also ready for war. This is a uniquely Russian cultural feature which the West has misread an innumerable number of time over the past 1000 years or so. Over and over again have the Europeans attacked Russia only to find themselves into a fight they would never have imagined, even in their worst nightmares. This is why the Russians like to say that “Russia never starts wars, she only ends them”.

There is a profound cultural chasm between how the West views warfare and how the Russians do. In the West, warfare is, really, “the continuation of politics by other means”. For Russians, it is a ruthless struggle for survival. Just look at generals in the West: they are polished and well mannered managers much more similar to corporate executives than with, say, Mafia bosses. Take a look at Russian generals (for example, watch the Victory Day parade in Moscow). In comparison to their western colleagues they look almost brutish, because first and foremost they are ruthless and calculating killers. I don’t mean that in a negative way – they often are individually very honorable and even kind men, and like every good commander, they care for their men and love their country. But the business they are in in not the continuation of politics by other means, the business they are in is survival. At all cost.

You cannot judge a military or, for that matter, a nation, by how it behaves when it triumphs, when it is on the offensive pursing a defeated enemy. All armies look good when they are winning. You can really judge of the nature of a military, or a nation, at its darkest hour, when things are horrible and the situation worse than catastrophic. That was the case in 1995 when the Eltsin regime ordered a totally unprepared, demoralized, poorly trained, poorly fed, poorly equipped and completely disorganized Russian military (well, a few hastily assembled units) to take Grozny from the Chechens. It was hell on earth. Here is some footage of General Lev Rokhlin in a hastily organized command post in a basement inside Grozy. He is as exhausted, dirty and exposed as any of his soldiers. Just look at his face and look at the faces of the men around him. This is what the Russian army looks like when it is in the depth of hell, betrayed by the traitors sitting in the Kremlin and abandoned by most if the Russian people (who, I am sorry to remind here, mostly were only were dreaming of McDonalds and Michael Jackson in 1995).



Can you imagine, say, General Wesley Clark or David Petraeus fighting like these men did?

Check out this video of General Shamanov reading the riot act to a local Chechen politician (no translation need):

Vladimir_Shamanov._Cabinet_photo

Shamanov nowadays is the Commander in Chief of the Airborne Forces (see photo) whose size Putin quietly doubled to 72’000, something I mentioned in the past as highly relevant, especially in comparison with the rather tepid force level increases announced by NATO (see “EU suidice by reality denial”). To get a feel for what modern Russian airborne forces are like, check out this article.

It is not my intention here to glorify nuclear war or the Russian Armed Forces. The reason for this, and many other, articles is to try to raise the alarm about what I see is happening nowadays. Western leaders are drunk on their own imperial hubris, nations which in the past were considered as minor stains on a map now feel emboldened to constantly provoke a nuclear superpower, Americans are being lied to and promised that some magical high tech will protect them from war while the Russians are seriously gearing up for WWIII because they have come to the conclusion that the only way to prevent that war is to make absolutely and unequivocally clear to the AngloZionists that they will never survive a war with Russia, even if every single Russian is killed.

I remember the Cold War well. I was part of it. And I remember that the vast majority of us, on both sides, realized that a war between Russia and the West must be avoided at all costs. Now I am horrified when I read articles by senior officials seriously discussing such a possibility.

Just read this article, please: What would a war between the EU and Russia look like? Here is what this guy writes:

To the poetically inclined, the Russian military looks more like a gigantic pirate crew, than a regular army. The ones who rule are the ones with the sharpest cutlass and biggest mouth, typically some scurvy infested mateis who rely on the support of their mates to make any unpopular “officer” walk the plank… Or, more apt, they resemble the members of the cossack horde, run by the brashier warriors… While these troops can be very brave, at times, they are not effective in the field against a well regulated and trained modern military machine. Given this, it is improbably, ney, impossible for ordinary Russian troops to conduct operations of major consequence at more than platoon level against any disciplined armies, especially the US, British, German, or French.

The dream of the West
“For our zoo” (old Western dream)

This kind of writing really scares me. Not because of the imbecilic and racist stupidity of it, but because it largely goes unchallenged in the mainstream media. Not only that, there are plenty such articles written elsewhere (see here, here or here). Of course, the authors of that kind of “analyses” make their money precisely the kind of manic cheer-leading for the western forces, but that is exactly the mindset which got Napoleon and Hitler in trouble and which ended with Russian forces stationed in Paris and Berlin. Compare that kind of jingoistic and, frankly, irresponsible nonsense with what a real military commander, Montgomery, had to say on this topic:

The next war on land will be very different from the last one, in that we shall have to fight it in a different way. In reaching a decision on that matter, we must first be clear about certain rules of war. Rule 1, on page I of the book of war, is: “Do not march on Moscow”. Various people have tried it, Napoleon and Hitler, and it is no good. That is the first rule.

So who do you trust? Professional cheerleaders or professional soldiers? Do you really believe that Obama (or Hillary), Merkel and Hollande will do better than Napoleon or Hitler?

If the AngloZionist ‘deep state’ is really delusional enough to trigger a war with Russia, in Europe or elsewhere, the narcissistic and hedonistic West, drunk on its own propaganda and hubris, will discover a level of violence and warfare it cannot even imagine and if that only affected those responsible for these reckless and suicidal policies it would be great. But the problem is, of course, that many millions of us, simple, regular people, will suffer and die as a consequence of our collective failure to prevent that outcome. I hope and pray that my repeated warnings will at least contribute to what I hope is a growing realization that this folly has to be immediately stopped and that sanity must return to politics.

The Saker
Avarachan
BRFite
Posts: 567
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 21:06

Re: Russia: News/Analysis/Discussion

Post by Avarachan »

http://thesaker.is/grandmaster-putin-gr ... -16-years/

This is a translation from Russian--that's why the verbiage is a bit awkward.

"Grandmaster Putin (Grandiose multi-step operation lasting 16 years)," June 17, 2016, by "RoSsiBaRBeRa."
Translated by Eugenia (a huge THANK YOU to Eugenia for this huge and complex translation! The Saker)

Source: https://cont.ws/post/269818

The 1990s are behind us, as is the breakup of the Soviet Union. The 2000s balancing over the cliff, the years of the debt slavery to IMF, unlimited rule of the oligarchs, the status of the regional power, gangs of non-systemic opposition by the American embassy, isolation and haughty attitude – all of this is in the past.

It is very important today, having finished that part of our path, to learn lessons from the past. Particularly because the war itself hasn’t disappeared, and the pressure of the collective West on our country is very much in evidence right now.

The most important conclusion appears to be that the deepest and the most prolonged depressions in the history of Russia coincide not with wars but with the periods of revolutions. Nineteen seventeenth, nineteen ninety first, and, finally, the aborted one, two thousand twelfth.

The dynamics of the GDP per capita in Russia from 1885 through 2011.
The dynamics of the GDP per capita in Russia from 1885 through 2011. The value for 1913 is 100%.

To destroy our country, our “friend and partners” were counting precisely on revolutions. And we have to admit that relying on a revolution in Russia rather than on a military confrontation with it, they have created the largest number of problems and difficulties for us.

If the Bolsheviks managed to reach the pre-war level after the WWI and civil war in the first 5-year period, and the losses after the Great Patriotic war were already recouped by 1955, we are still recovering after the catastrophe of 1991 with great difficulty.

GDP of Russia – USSR – Russian Federation in % of the GDP of the USA
GDP of Russia – USSR – Russian Federation in % of the GDP of the USA

Only at the end of two thousand twelfth after the defeat of the most dangerous attempt at revolution, Russia succeeded in transferring the battle for its sovereignty to the international front. The country did not only succeed in defending itself but also developed immunity to further attempts by the West to arrest the Russia’s development using the traditional Western tools – regime change and incitement of internecine conflicts. The country has come to understand the most important thing – the mortal danger of a stab in the back administered within its own borders.

Thanks to that, we have gained time and are continuing to develop successfully.

Russian GDP (PPP) since 1989Even the enormous pressure the West consolidated against us, its sanctions, engineered drop in the oil prices, economic sabotage and juridical outrage in 2015 – the pressure that would have brought down any other country – in Russia only resulted in 3% reduction in GDP. Furthermore, by the end of this year, according to the European estimates, Russia is to expect positive growth.

Wars, crises, pressure, maligning – all of this does not really scare us. We have always weathered storms and have always emerged from them stronger than before.

Table: Three crises in comparison

Selection_254

Our chief enemy has always been the “5th column” inside the country. Those “our people” that betrayed our country at some time or other and, for the money of their sponsors, deceived their former compatriots. Fortunately, today we have become much more experienced, everyone has Internet available, and the Russian society is united by the deep sense of patriotism and generally is much more cohesive that even a few years ago.

All of this gives us a good chance to move our country to a new level of development.

Today, we already are in possession of an outstanding army.

Most powerful armies in the worldWe are one of the recognized leaders in technological innovations. We are again welcoming more little compatriots as the population growth is being restored after catastrophic 1990s.

Selection_252
Population growth in 1961-2016.

The geopolitical, diplomatic and military multi-step combinations devised by the Russian leadership time and again win the upper hand over the multibillion dollar analytical and specialized “agencies” of the Western countries.

But all these achievements are not the accidents of fate but the results of the tremendous effort, sophisticated analysis, well-calculated tactics and brilliant strategy.

Putin’s operation of 16 years duration

In the West, propaganda is usually considered connected with two phenomena – war and power, but it is recognized that propaganda by itself is unable to guarantee the loyalty of the people or popularity to any leader. That is why powers that be often ensure loyalty by force. Since the Western world is convinced that it is the “Crown of Creation”, it explains the Putin’s popularity rating by either propaganda, or the authoritarian nature of the regime, or by both. The ordinary people in the West are restricted by biased Western media to the view of reality in those simplistic terms. Only these paradigms are discussed or described in interviews.

That is precisely how propaganda operates, not imagined one but the real Western propaganda. The truth is hidden behind the different types of lie, and an ordinary person living, say, in the US has a hard type understanding the real situation.

In 2000s, Russia was of no interest to the world’s media. In 2007 at the Munich conference, tough words of President Putin perplexed the West. The media exploded with the headlines “Who is mister Putin?” arousing in the West a certain amount of interest towards Russia. However, since Putin’s words were addressed to the leaders of the Western countries and not to their citizens, the interest did not last long. In his speech that had the effect of turning the international relations upside down, Putin stated the most important idea – “enough is enough, Russia will no longer follow recommendations and demands from the outside. Period”.

The West was not slow to react: in 2008 the West decided to teach a lesson to that not particularly important “former superpower”. A puppet regime was used to destabilize the most vulnerable region of the country – the Caucasus. This was done in a traditionally underhanded dishonorable manner during the Olympic games, the event, for which for centuries wars used to be stopped. A signal to our country was sent.

Unexpectedly, however, a ruined fragment of once powerful country sent “rusted leftovers” of its once powerful military beyond its borders and crushed the Western-trained “invincible” army. That was unexpected, but, on the other hand, quite typical of the Russians. After all, we have always been considered the best warriors in the world, and the US did not see in the events anything menacing for itself. They understood very well that the important thing wasn’t who won on the ground but what would be told to the world about the conflict. The winner would be the one named the winner by the world media. As a result, after successfully forcing Georgia to accept peace settlement, the US easily won the information war over Russia and supplanted reality with a fiction.

Everything quieted down. Russia kept doing something in its “regional corner” without bothering the serious people of the world. The leader that said such dangerous things in 2008 left the position of the President and, judging by the reports, the current President was quite acceptable for the West. The US did not see much sense to do anything at all about Russia. Why bother pressuring the country if it is not doing anything and is incapable to overcome its own deficiencies?

The years passed, and the new elections approached. The 5th column of the country started to send alarming report, and the West decided to check them out. The disintegrated army kept buying the Western military equipment; the minister of defense was clearly incompetent individual; the economy was slowly growing but still the money was being spent incompetently. The treasuries were being bought as usual; the foreign corporations have unlimited access – so, there was no cause to worry. One thing bothered, though – the popularity rating of that same Putting who had several times defeated the western schemes. Using the data of the liberal 5th column, which has always been the conduit of the Western influence in Russia, anglo-saxons decided to use their favorite well-tested method.

After the elections to the State Duma, right in the middle of the presidential campaign, the civil unrest was initiated in the country; billions of dollars were poured into the Russia via the non-government organization (NGO), which had not been closed during the entire preceding period, via the agents of influence and embassy officials. The entire network in Russia was activated at once. The liberal puppets delivered exultant reports; local non-government media night and day broadcasted interviews and speeches of the opposition figures, and not only the ones controlled by the West but also politicians that decided it was time to join them. Everything was going according to plan, and the final hour was coming.

The first annoying sign was the refusal to grant the permission to hold the meeting on the Triumphal Square. The opposition had to settle for the permission to conduct their action on the Bolotnya Square. However, the 5th column felt on top of the world expecting total success and did not pay attention to this fact. . .

The second sign, which caused serious anxiety among the Western field agents, was the meeting of Vladimir Putin with the population that demonstrated clear disgust of the society with the opposition politicians and desire to demonstrate support for the President. But since Putin took no steps to use the popular support, these demonstrations were declared by the opposition-controlled media to have been staged, and the preparation for the meeting on Bolotnya continued according to the all too familiar plan . . .

The decisive action occurred 2 kilometers away from Bolotnoya, on Manezh Square . . . And the whole grandiose operation failed at once, within several hours . . .

All the events at that time and the actions of our President were a dangerous game. Many Russian citizens still do not appreciate how dangerous the events of that day were. Putin’s game was a complex intrigue and very risky.

It is well known that the greater the risk, the greater the prize. Net result of that operation was outing of the whole network of Western influence in the country, full takeover of the media fed by Western funds, full control over politicians and others who then acted on the side of the West, and the ability to control liberal faction in the government, which still lives under the Damoclean sword of compromising information obtained back then.

These events, a complete defeat of Anglo-Saxons in a game they were considered great masters of, caused total prostration of the collective West. The West put in a considerable effort to determine the real situation in the country, as it clearly saw the discrepancy between the reports of the “5th column” and reality. However, as the network of Western influence and its sources were “cleaned up” by the Russian special services, and every step of known agents of Western influence in power was controlled, this work was slow…

But the longer was the analysis, the more dreadful looked the reality…

It turned out that the army, which was presumably being destroyed by one “economist”, in reality had been thoroughly reformed; the industry serving the military was regularized; engineering teams had lots of contracts; military units that were thought to increase only a little were rearmed at incredible pace, and all that after reports that the country cannot produce anything and is buying Western samples for that reason. But the worst (for the West) situation was in the economy. How did in just ten years a country that was 69th by GDP surpass Germany, fifth economy in the world and #1 in Europe! How did the economy grow almost at Chinese speed!

Selection_253
Dynamics of Russia GDP per capita from 1885 through 2011 (The value for 1913 is 100%)

The strategy of containment was revived, specialists were reassigned to this direction, a huge army of special services personnel was directed against this old and still unbroken competitor. The West knew full well that if it does not stop the Russian revival now, while Russia is still not quite stable on its feet, it could lose not only the influence over Russia, but also the world hegemony.

From 2014 to 2015, Russia was subjected to assaults that no country was supposed to withstand, particularly not a country that just had a pre-revolutionary situation.

The project, which is at least 600 years old, of making part of the Russian people a weapon against Russia, is revived. Ukraine, which was quetly being destroyed by the West during all this period, using an example that worked in the middle of the XXth century, is rapidly converted into a military battering ram against Russia.

The West acts quickly, often sloppily, and at the beginning the Russian special services successfully counteract this. However, the pressure and financing turns out to be so great, with so many countries involved, that the situation changes dramatically. Several operations, including Maidan, are conducted in rapid succession. The majority of European countries unexpectedly support the creation of the temporary government, depriving Russia of the claim of illegitimacy of the new powers, whereas the media organize an unprecedented operation of whitewashing the coup in Ukraine. Under the circumstances, Russia has to wash its hands off the Ukrainian political process. Although in this the West won, it does not stand to reason to accuse Russia of doing nothing in Ukraine during the last 20 years.

In the 90s, Russia was in many ways weaker than separated from it Ukraine, and could only focus on its own survival. The Western media wrote with glee that the military potential of military Ukraine was greater than that of the Russian Federation. Indeed, as far as military hardware is concerned, Western analysts were right. One has to wonder how this colossal potential, essentially stolen from the Soviet people by “independent” Ukraine, could be wasted in just 20 years… Next, in the 2000s, Russia with great effort but quietly was restoring itself and did not have the capacity to interfere with the affairs of a foreign state. Only after 2012, Russia reemerges on the international stage.

What could have been done in just two years, when by that time the West had more than two decades to nurture in Ukraine a generation of its admirers?

Everything cannot be done at once.

However, Russians do not surrender, so, having distanced itself from the events in Kiev, Russia concentrated on Crimea.

The first actions of the new power in Kiev caused protests in Crimea, where the majority of the population is Russian-speaking. In parallel, Russian influence was mobilized via public organizations, such as “Russian community of Crimea” and party “Russian Unity”. In addition, direct dialog with the local powers in the autonomy was established. Few people know that, by Crimean peninsula, being an autonomy within Ukraine, right after Maidan events received an ultimatum from new Kiev authorities. The leadership of Crimea was told that within a day a plane will depart in the direction of Crimea, with new administration, and that military hardware is moving towards Crimea. The leadership was strongly recommended to leave before the arrival of the new administration. The details of the military operation prepared against them by the junta were forwarded to the Crimean authorities by Russia, and the Crimean authorities immediately asked the Russian Federation for the help.

In the morning of February 23, Putin tasked the heads of the armed forces and police to begin preparatory work for the return of Crimea to Russia. On March 1, Russian solders with local volunteers blocked all installations of the Ukrainian military on the peninsula. In the early morning of February 27, in response to an attempt of supporters of Mejlis and new Ukrainian powers to take over the building of the Crimean parliament, Russian special forces took over the defense of Crimean administrative buildings, and Supreme Soviet of Crimea decided to conduct an all-Crimea referendum. Sergey Aksenov, the leader of “Russian Unity” party, became the head of the new Crimean government. He announced that Crimea does not recognize new the Ukrainian government and asked Russia to “help ensure peace and quiet in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea”. The referendum about the status of Crimea was held on March 16. Based on its results, Republic of Crimea signed a treaty about joining Russia.

After that huge fiasco with the loss of the most valuable for the West part of its new colony and inglorious retreat of the battleship “Donald Cook” sent to “help”, the US became furious.

Virtually immediately, in April, the West showed its true colors by initiating a hot conflict. Using its puppets and supported by a part of Ukrainian population, Kiev starts an aggression against Eastern Ukraine bordering Russia. The operation verges on genocide of Russian population in the area. Ukraine uses prohibited by international conventions phosphorus bombs, cassette bombs, burns people alive, deliberately targets civilians, and so on. All this demonstrated cruelty has one purpose: to force Russia to invade the territory of a foreign country. Everything was done to achieve this, but even more was done to close the trap thus prepared for the “Russian bear” once it is in it …

The world media were on the ready; engaged politicians froze with microphones near their mouths, the world public opinion was prepared, and in Russia the game “Putin, move in the troops!” was played out…

The world stopped in anticipation… And… nothing happened…

Nothing that the West expected happened, but something else did happen. Putin withstood enormous pressure, but dozens of spy satellites observing Russian-Ukrainian border showed that Russian army remained on its positions. While collective West held the trap open and looked at it, in a different place, a bit to the side, two independent republics were declared unexpectedly, which unexpectedly had armed militias. Every day the quantity and quality of these militias, their supplies and support, grew. Since then the army of the aborigines in the new colony, Ukraine, taught by the US, suffered shameful defeats, encirclements, and surrenders. In the meantime, the West pretended to be a second Napoleon trying to convince the world without a modicum of proof of Russian involvement that one of the most powerful armies on the planet fights in Ukraine with its invisible ghost divisions…

The military path turned out to be a dead end for the US, and to prevent further defeats, which tarnished the image of the world “policeman”, the West, as is its wont, asked to start negotiations…

At the same time, the collective West conducted in another part of the world a greatest military operation since WWII – the creation of controllable tools –the terrorist armies.

Thing is, right now we live in the world with a military balance. The nuclear potential of the two powers does not allow the West to start a war for absolute world domination. The probability of mutual destruction for many years prevents the US and its satellites from starting a global war against Russia and its allies. Russian breakthrough in the development of hypersonic weapons (read here) makes the prospect of military success against it even less likely.

Even incorporation of new colonies the West has to conduct via financial expansion, which is slow, expensive, and not as effective as it would like. Thus, on the background of weakened Russia, with unprecedented provocation on September 11, the grand operation of destabilizing whole parts of the planet was launched, and the policy of controlled chaos was initiated. After staged events with twin towers, the world was told that terrorism is the main enemy. Interestingly, in 2001 terrorism was not a great threat; futheremore, few countries were familiar with it, except Russia and Israel. Importantly, the influence and spread of terrorism increased as the US, under the pretext of war on terrorism, occupied one country after another. While Russia, after taking over new territories, leaves universities, culture, economy, and life in its wake, the US taking over countries leave anarchy, chaos, and always the armies of ORGANIZED terrorists.

Thus, on the one hand, the US got a pretext to invade resource-rich countries and the ability to print more money to finance these wars, while, on the other hand, forming terrorist armies controlled by them.

There were several reasons for this plan.

First – the American debt. And ever increasing problems of servicing it, as it grows.

Second – the creation of chaos. By creating it everywhere except at home the US forms an impression that it is a “safe haven” for capital, attracting enormous financial flows to the US from destabilized regions.

Third, which is the most important, terrorist groups are not state armies. They cannot be attacked with nukes, as they act on the territories of countries. The terror does not maintain a traditional frontline, but it has commanders. This makes them a controllable tool. The only party that could stop terror, according to the Western plan, was the US, and any disobedience towards the US would immediately precipitate a terrorist attack.

Forth – TTIP. The treaty needed by the shadow financial rulers, corporations and finance groups. To stimulate its signing, millions of migrants, created by controlled chaos, were sent to Europe. The final act was getting close and everything was ready.

On September 29, 2015, the US and terrorist and mercenary groups controlled by them are within 20 km of Damascus. The key piece of the American operation, Syria, was almost ready to take its appointed place, the US is celebrating…

All of a sudden, on September 30, 2015, Russian air force starts airstrikes against terror groups all over the Syrian territory, which the world community and its special services did not expect. Bombers and strikers, protected by fighter jets and helicopters, Russia-based planes of Russian strategic air force, launches of cruise missiles from ships of Black Sea and Caspian fleets, salvos of newest cruise missiles “Calibr” of various modifications nobody knew about. The Russian airbase was protected by marines, paratroopers of the Russian airforce an army special forces. Also, the base was protected by arriving systems of PRO, radio-electronic warfare, whereas Russian warships entered the Mediterranean. Military transport planes, which Russia, according to presumably reliable intelligence, could not have in such quantities, created a “bridge” between the two countries, transporting unbelievable quantities of military supplies.

The seemingly successful Western operation of creating an arc of instability and forming from the remnants of Libya, Syria and Iraq of a new state controlled by the US, which was supposed to supply terrorism, that was almost competed, was ruined. More than 10 years of work, several states, many hundreds of billions of dollars, with the endgame in Syria, were crushed by the Polite Army…

Naturally, nothing is over yet. While in Syria mile after mile of the territory is taken away from terrorists, and the country, thanks to Russia, got a peace of sorts, the US still has Libya and Iraq.

But these are geopolitical issues, which will be dealt with in due time. The Russian Syria, meanwhile, is a question of our security, a foothold beyond the state borders. With this foothold, Western plans to push controlled terror by it to the Central Asia, the Russian underbelly, became much less acute and dangerous.

Still, it is guaranteed that right there we should expect the next “gift” from our foreign “friends and partners”.

GENERAL CONCLUSIONS

Unfortunately, lots of people still do not think about why the US and England now pressure our country so fiercely. One can find the answer above. As well as in evaluating what exactly did stop the first large-scale military operation of post-Soviet Russia outside of its territory.

There is no doubt that Western attempts to put pressure on our economy, destabilize our civil society, lure Russia into anti-Russian unions, and play on inter-ethnic tensions will continue.

However, we must acknowledge that the fears of Western states are quite justified…

Huge territory, colossal resources, intelligent population, high morality – Russia has everything to become a dominant state. History shows that every time Russia overcame one aggression or another and the pressure on it temporarily weakened, a period of furious development followed. Getting rid of “shackles and burdens” that held the country down, Russia invariably responded by numerous actions, accomplishments, successes, and rapid growth.

Thus, it is hardly surprising that during these periods the West hastily united and collectively put pressure on our country. In other words, it did exactly what we see today.

Luckily, excellent diplomacy, masterful actions in geopolitics and a well-reasoned approach to internal enemies, as well as the best in the world nuclear defense force, in addition to the highly mobile and professional army, allow Russia to strengthen its constructive role as a Eurasian super-power, the role of the main counterbalance to imperial hegemony of the US and liberal madness of the EU.

Taken together, all of this can in the foreseeable future make our country a recognized leader of the world resistance to corporatocracy, globalization, false tolerance and political correctness, turn it into the main defender of traditional spiritual, religious, moral, and historic values of all peoples on Earth against the West that lost all bearings.
habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6919
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: Russia: News/Analysis/Discussion

Post by habal »

George Soros Betting On Emergent Russia as New Global Force as Europe Collapses

Soros sees Russia emerging as global power as EU fades

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-russi ... SKCN0Z629H
habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6919
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: Russia: News/Analysis/Discussion

Post by habal »

BRICS Banks Will Issue Bonds In Members Currency Bypassing The US Dollar

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ql0Sx6WtE7c

Caterpillar retail sales decline for 42 months in a row.

Obama's economic recovery does not hold water, his predictions never came true.

Baltic Dry Index declines to 582.

Obama is calling the height of the market by telling people to buy now.

BRICS banks are now issuing bonds in local currencies bypassing the US Dollar.
Avarachan
BRFite
Posts: 567
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 21:06

Re: Russia: News/Analysis/Discussion

Post by Avarachan »

Lots of interesting links.
http://thesaker.is/made-in-russia-viii/

Link to the entire series:
http://thesaker.is/tag/made-in-russia/
Avarachan
BRFite
Posts: 567
Joined: 04 Jul 2006 21:06

Re: Russia: News/Analysis/Discussion

Post by Avarachan »

http://cluborlov.blogspot.com/2017/10/p ... unked.html
By far the most popular article I ever published on this blog was titled Putin to Western Elites: Play-time is Over. It came out almost exactly three years ago, after that year’s Valdai Club conference, and was based on the speech Putin gave at that conference. It garnered close to 200,000 page hits—more than twice more than the next most popular one—because it pointed out something very significant: a sea change in international relations had occurred, heralding the end of America’s unipolar moment when it could dictate terms to the entire world.

Essentially, in that speech Putin signaled to Western elites that they were no longer qualified to play the game of international relations of today and had to go back to school for retraining. And now, three years later, Putin has issued them a final report card, giving them an F in every category: they have learned nothing ....

Turning to specifics, Putin noted that “Russia and the United States bear a special responsibility to the world as the two largest nuclear powers.” Russia and the US have signed a number of arms limitation and reduction treaties, but while Russia has scrupulously fulfilled its obligations, the US has been remiss. For example, on eliminating surplus weapons-grade plutonium,
[The Americans] started building a plant on the Savannah River Site. Its initial price tag was $4.86 billon but they spent almost $8 billion, brought construction to 70 percent and then froze the project. But, to our knowledge, the budget request for 2018 includes $270 million for the closure and mothballing of this facility. As usual, a question arises: where is the money? Probably stolen. Or they miscalculated something when planning its construction. Such things happen. They happen here all too often. But we are not interested in this, this is not our business. We are interested in what happens with uranium and plutonium. What about the disposal of plutonium? Dilution and geological storage of the plutonium is suggested. But this completely contradicts the spirit and letter of the agreement, and, most important, does not guarantee that the dilution is not reconverted into weapons-grade plutonium. All this is very unfortunate and bewildering.
To be fair, designing and building such a reactor is a tricky task; many have tried, but only Russia has succeeded. The Americans lack the knowhow, but are too proud and embarrassed to ask for help.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Russia: News/Analysis/Discussion

Post by Philip »

.
Last edited by Philip on 29 Oct 2017 10:02, edited 1 time in total.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Russia: News/Analysis/Discussion

Post by Philip »

Putin has held Russia together despite the best efforts of the US and UK to oust him.He despite massive sanctions,etc.,has kept his economy steady ,increased defence exports, and with rising oil prices keeping his economy afloat quite easily.Remember Russia's debt?V.low just 12% of GDP.US debt doubled to $10 trillion a few years ago,is now $20 trillion(!!!) ,while in 2017,Russia held $100B of US debt! Almost 50%of US debt is held by other nations.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Russia: News/Analysis/Discussion

Post by Philip »

The centenary of the "Great October Revolution" came and went with hardly a squeak from the gallery in either the east or west,incredible! The Russian Revolution which sparked off such cataclysmic events in the 20th century,the catalyst for the end of the monarchies in Europe,WW1,WW2,and the Cold War thereafter.That led to the Korean War,Vietnam and global proxy wars and regime changes in S.Am in particular.

Russia today is no longer a Communist state,though there is a residue of sentiment of the old days both in Russia and more so in (E) Germany. Even in E.Europe,there is much sentiment in the longing for job security which the state provided that kept people fed,housed and relatively happy,unlike being thrown to the wolves in the crony-capitalist regimes that were part of the colour revolutions,where the national silver was hived off to oligarchs
hand in glove with western MNCs.The collapse of the USSR was to have been a defeat of Communism globally,but there were a few centres of resistance which held out against every trick in the book that the US and West could try,esp. in Cuba. South and Central American nations have swung both ways ,just like the tide. and still do.

But what lessons have we learnt from the RR? What influence has it had or has it still to have fir future generations? Amazingly die-hard Communism is alive and kicking in India ,in Kerala,though the pinkos of the CPM have lost their lair Bengal.I suppose it's the "on;y in India" factor why we're the world's largest and greatest democracy,willing to try out any ideology and individual.In Russia the RR celebs on a grand scale would've meant opening old wounds still raw beneath the scabs of the warring between reds and Whites,WW2 and in that aftermath the Stalinist era of purges,and gulags.However,the RR inflamed the desire of nations groaning under the colonial and imperial yoke to break free and overthrow their rulers either by force or by nonviolent,non-cooperation movements with the Indian Freedom struggle as the guiding light.

Lenin is to remain where he is lying in permanent state in Red Square,as a symbol of Russia it appears but a serious review of the influence of the RR is perhaps too early as a new Cold War has swept in from the West and US this time round,as the US tries to retain its global Pax Americana ,increasingly floundering in the Middle east,Europe and Asia,with the emergence of China and the revival of Russia under Putin.Instead of socialist revolutions sweeping the globe,we are seeing the re-emergence of the far Right especially in Europe and increasingly nationalist movements in Asia,esp. China.
In a world still racked by conflict and Islamic fundamentalism alive and kicking,insidiously penetrating western "Christian" nations,one feels that we are on the brink of yet another global earthquake which the RR was 100 yrs. ago. There is more historical interest in western Europe affected more by the RR than elsewhere ,with sev. insightful articles appearing in the media.here are a couple.Great food for thought and debate.

The influence of Germany who supported Lenin and his return to Russia has been a subject of debate for decades.
Here's an xcpt. from the NYT.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/19/opin ... agent.html
Was Lenin a German Agent?
So was Lenin a German agent?

In his own mind, Lenin could and did justify his actions as tactical maneuvers serving the higher cause of Communism, not the sordid war aims of the German Imperial Government. Fair enough. But it is hard to imagine this defense holding up at trial, if the jury were composed of ordinary Russians while the war was still going on. The evidence assembled by Kerensky’s justice department, much of which has only recently been rediscovered in the Russian archives, was damning. No matter Lenin’s real intentions, it is undeniable that he received German logistical and financial support in 1917, and that his actions, from antiwar agitation in the Russian armies to his request for an unconditional cease-fire, served the interests of Russia’s wartime enemy in Berlin. They also brought about disastrous consequences for Russia herself, from territorial dismemberment in 1918 to decades of agony under the suffocating Bolshevik dictatorship.

The Russian Revolution inaugurated a new era in foreign influence operations. Lenin himself helped to found the Communist International, which for nearly a quarter of a century was dedicated to trying to topple capitalist governments around the world. The Nazis played a similar game in Austria and Czechoslovakia in 1938, only to abandon the pretense of influence-peddling for brute force when, along with the Soviet Red Army from the east, they invaded Poland from the west in 1939. During the Cold War, the Soviet Union and the United States turned Revolutionierungspolitik into an art form, striving to undermine one another’s allies and satellite states by all manner of subterfuge and subversion.

Today, it appears that a new round of the Cold War has emerged, though with a different ideological flavor, as the Kremlin promotes populist nationalism in Europe and the United States, even as Western leaders and democracy activists mobilize opposition against Russia and Putin-friendly regimes, such as Viktor Orban’s in Hungary — which then crack down on such activists as “foreign agents.” Revolutionierungspolitik has gone global.

Before panic sets in, it is well to be reminded of the difference in degree, and kind, of today’s foreign influence-peddling compared with past episodes. Disinformation spread by state media, online bots and Twitter trolls is a serious nuisance, taking advantage of the openness of Western societies to undermine confidence in democratic institutions; cyberattacks and hacking are more serious still. For their part, Mr. Putin and his defenders denounce outside political interference in places like Ukraine, claiming that Russian moves there are mere reactions to Western meddling.

Yet none of these influence operations are comparable, in scale or geopolitical impact, to Germany’s playing of the Lenin card, or indeed to what the United States and Soviet Union did during the Cold War. Unlike Russia in 1917, the great power governments of today, whether in Washington, Paris, Berlin or Moscow, are too strongly entrenched to fall prey to a Lenin. Or so we must hope.

Sean McMeekin, a professor of history at Bard College, is the author of “The Russian Revolution: A New History.”
This is an essay in the series Red Century, about the history and legacy of Communism 100 years after the Russian Revolution.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/ ... go-on-show
Lenin the cat lover: rare photos of Soviet leader go on show in Oxford
Exhibition coinciding with centenary of October revolution includes image of revolutionary in wig and makeup, and stroking a cat
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21538
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Russia: News/Analysis/Discussion

Post by Philip »

But where will it start and who will lead the"revolution"? The only heavyweight on the scene who wants to revolutionise the globe and be at its centre is the Asian latter-day Nazi fuhrer,XI Gins!

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/long_ ... 39896.html
100 years on from the Russian Revolution, could a 21st century revolt bring about the end of capitalism?
Since 1917, countless social movements have taken their cue from this momentous uprising, and its lasting impact on the world may yet to be felt fully

Youssef El-Gingihy
Lenin's legacy – and that of the uprising he kickstarted – is still the subject of debate Getty
The centenary of the Russian Revolution comes at a strange moment. It is not being officially marked let alone celebrated in Putin’s Russia. The collapse and demise of communism in 1991 appears to have consigned it ironically to what Trotsky termed the dustbin of history.

The Russian Revolution has had a bad press in the West. And that is putting it mildly. Its leaders – Lenin, then Stalin – are often equated with Hitler as mass murderers who oversaw totalitarian regimes. The left was eventually forced to concede that the revolution transmuted into an autocratic regime embodied in the purges and gulags under Stalin. The victors, as they say, write the history books.

However, it is apparent that a selective amnesia is in operation. Stalin’s victims are remembered but not King Leopold’s in the Belgian Congo. Similarly, the crimes of the US empire – millions killed in the Korean, Vietnam and Iraq wars – are rarely mentioned in the same breath. As US general Curtis LeMay said of the Second World War: “I suppose if I had lost the war, I would have been tried as a war criminal.”

Yet it is important to separate out the legacy of Stalinism from the initial revolutionary moment. In one fell swoop, 1917 represented the sweeping away of centuries of Tsarism for millions of Russian serfs. Whilst Britain and France had undergone bourgeois and industrial capitalist revolutions from the 17th and 18th centuries onwards, Russia was a sleeping giant of agrarian feudalism.

The fervour was immortalised in Trotsky’s towering The History of the Russian Revolution and the American journalist John Reed’s Ten Days that Shook the World. Even Hollywood would celebrate this world-historical force of liberation in Warren Beatty’s Oscar-winning 1981 adaptation of Reed’s life Reds with an all-star cast that included Jack Nicholson and Diane Keaton, with Beatty in the lead role of Reed, of course.

clement-attlee.jpg
Clement Attlee's Labour manifesto of 1945 was responsive to the needs of the people – a new development in the history of capitalism (PA)
The Bolshevik victory immediately faced the counter-revolution internally and externally in common with all revolutions. A civil war erupted with the ancien régime backed by major world powers including Britain, France and the US. A critical question is how a revolution navigates these dangers without becoming authoritarian and betraying its ideals. Progressive movements that have attempted democratic revolutions – for example, Allende in Chile or more recently the Egyptian uprising of 2011 – have been brutally defeated by counter-revolutionary forces.

The literature on the Russian revolution is overwhelming. The centenary has seen a flurry of books published by luminaries of the left including Tariq Ali’s The Dilemmas of Lenin, Neil Faulkner’s A People’s History of the Russian Revolution, China Miéville’s October and Slavoj Zizek’s edited Lenin 2017.

The Dilemmas of Lenin is preoccupied with the necessary conditions for revolution and how it can succeed against all odds. Faulkner’s book, meanwhile, is a potted history of the revolution, myth-busting many of the preconceptions around the early period. The collapse of communism was a quarter of a century ago – so what is their assessment of the Russian Revolution 100 years on?

READ MORE
The revolution centenary almost everyone in Russia wants to ignore :rotfl:
Faulkner (whose acquaintance I have recently made) emphasises that it is necessary to “correct the popular understanding that what collapsed was communism in the sense of a radical political alternative”. He says: “What the term comes to mean is a political dictatorship presiding over a state capitalist economy. The Russian Revolution as an attempt to transform the world and create socialism or communism in its original meaning was defeated in the 1920s. The mass working-class democracy which had created it was destroyed.”

Tariq Ali replies: “It was a necessary social revolution that toppled the Tsarist autocracy in February and capitalism in November.” He adds that “the creation of the Red Army that survived Stalin’s purges went on to destroy the spinal cord of the Third Reich at Kursk and Stalingrad. Private Ivan, not Private Ryan won the Second World War. This should never be forgotten.” Indeed, three quarters of the German Wehrmacht’s losses were on the eastern front fighting the Soviets. :mrgreen:

The conditions forging the golden age of post-war capitalism were highly unusual. In the wake of the Great Depression, the Glass-Steagall Act had curtailed the unfettered power of the banks in the US. The cataclysm of the Second World War left 60 million dead. There was a strong desire to create a peaceful, just and fair Europe in which such horrors would never be repeated.

A triumphant Winston Churchill unexpectedly lost out to Labour in Britain’s 1945 elections. The Labour manifesto, promising a welfare state complete with a National Health Service, public housing and pensions, was responsive to the needs of the British people. The social democratic model was a new development in the history of capitalism.

At the end of the First World War, the Bolshevik revolution had already anointed one-sixth of the globe under the rule of communism. After the Second World War, Mao Zedong’s revolution in China meant that one-third of the globe was now cast in the red dye. US planners conceived of this catastrophic event as ‘losing China’, the implication being that China’s rightful place was in a global economic system under the helm of the United States. The irresistible rise of communism appeared unstoppable.

Martin Luther King Jr at the Lincoln Memorial during the March on Washington in 1963. The civil rights and anti-war movements proved a volatile cocktail of destabilisation in the US during these years (Getty)
Arguably, the existential threat of communism was the critical factor forcing capitalism to make concessionary accommodations to the needs of ordinary people. As the African-American writer and social reformer Frederick Douglass put it in 1857: “Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will.” Faced with a competing alternative model of how a society might be organised, these concessions enabled capitalism to placate its citizens. Conservative MP Quintin Hogg had neatly summarised this stance referring to the Tommies returning from war: “If you do not give the people reform they are going to give you social revolution.”

Tariq Ali points out that the Russian Revolution “accelerated decolonisation and inspired the revolutions in Vietnam, China [and] Cuba”. It is certainly worth remembering that for much of the 20th century, Western progressives actually looked to the example of the Soviet Union. Swathes of Asia, Africa and Latin America were engaged in decolonisation struggles.

The wretched of the earth saw things slightly differently to the Western ruling classes. For world leaders (and millions of their supporters) such as Nehru in India, Nasser in Egypt, Ho Chi Minh of Vietnam, Lumumba of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Castro and Che Guevara in Cuba, the Soviet Union was viewed as a template for the overthrow of imperialism.

Decolonisation spread like wildfire as former colonies liberated themselves from the yoke of empire often aligning themselves with the Soviet Union. The Cold War transformed Asia, Africa and Latin America into a strategic playground of competing interests between the United States and the Soviet Union – the great game of great powers fighting it out for global hegemony across multiple theatres.

Indian independence signalled the beginning of the end for the British Empire. The 1956 Suez Crisis became the defining watershed moment for its decline and fall. It led to the scalp of British PM Anthony Eden. The respected journalist Mohamed Heikal – confidante of Egypt’s Nasser – wrote up his account of the crisis. The title – Cutting the Lion’s Tail – gives a sense of the David versus Goliath contest. The unthinkable had come to pass with the withdrawal of the once mighty British empire.

Other European powers were also in free fall. Even the inviolable might of the United States was revealed to be vulnerable with total defeat in South-east Asia following losses in the Korean and Vietnam wars.

A half-millennium of Western dominance was in retreat. The anxiety about the prospects of capitalism was such that the leaders of the West contemplated the unthinkable; that the Soviet Union could outperform them in economic terms. Mao’s description of capitalism as a paper tiger captured the sense that it was on the brink of collapse.

Most worryingly for the Western establishment, the tide had reached the gates of the citadel. At the end of the Second World War, communist parties in Italy, France and Greece were on the verge of electoral success. One of the early victories of the nascent CIA was preventing the seemingly unstoppable surge of communism into Western Europe. In Greece, a civil war erupted with Western powers backing anti-communist forces.

By the 1960s, social unrest was widespread. The upheaval in France of the soixante-huitards was accompanied by paralysis of the state with the very real possibility of revolution. In the US, the civil rights and anti-war movements proved a volatile cocktail of destabilisation. In 1968 alone, there were riots in 125 cities across America. The counterculture of the Sixties was an expression of heady times. Popular culture pulsated with the sense of limitless possibilities. It is no exaggeration to state that the world appeared to be on the verge of seismic change; a paradigm shift.

We all know what happened next. Soviet communism imploded with the resulting break-up of the USSR. Chinese communism remained so only nominally and morphed into turbo-capitalism. Thatcher and Reagan ushered in an era of neoliberalism and unleashed a full-throttle capitalism red in tooth and claw.

Marx’s prediction that the spectre of communism would sweep across the world appeared to be coming true. Yet late capitalism managed to outlast its most formidable opponent through adaptability and plasticity. So will capitalism simply keep on going through adaptation?

In Tariq Ali’s view, “the Russian Revolution was very good for Western social democracy. Capitalism was forced to make real concessions. The fall of the Soviet Union led to the worst type of predatory capitalism (globalisation) praised endlessly and uncritically by The Economist and the Financial Times. But as long as there is no alternative to capitalism, it will survive. Talk of a spontaneous implosion and collapse are far-fetched.”

Neil Faulkner says: “The system is immensely powerful and it is multi-layered. Unlike Tsarist Russia in 1917, where the state and the ruling class was extremely weak, modern capitalist societies have layer upon layer upon layer of civil society institutions.”

The project of decolonisation curdled with progressive people’s movements being overthrown by or mutating into repressive regimes. Whilst once Western powers had colonised countries, now neocolonialism guaranteed their hegemony through a foreign policy of aiding client states alongside undermining rogue states. Even this neocolonialism model has evolved. “Free” trade now facilitates a globalised economy. The US economist Francis Fukuyama pronounced this model of free market economics combined with liberal democracy as the end of history.

The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 was a defining moment in the ideological shifts of the late 20th century (Getty)
Capitalism was the all-singing, all-dancing exultant ideology of the day. It was the only show in town. When the Berlin Wall came down, it appeared that capitalism was destined to last forever.


To many commentators, social democracy was proof that capitalism was capable of enacting the type of reforms that Marx had never anticipated. It was thus capable of providing an ever higher standard of living for its populations. Retrospectively, the Nineties now seem like an idyllic period of modern history. The marriage of liberal democracy and free market economics looked like a match made in heaven. At least to some. Even that phrase laissez-faire denotes a certain sweetness as if one were describing some kind of sexually liberated practice.

But, as it turned out, the era of social democracy was a blip. When Tony Blair severed Clause Four, he signalled an age of centrist policies. By perpetuating the neoliberal doctrines of Margaret Thatcher, New Labour consecrated a new era in which the political spectrum had collapsed into a continuum. When Thatcher was asked what she regarded as her greatest achievement, she pithily replied: “New Labour.”

Who could have possibly predicted what was about to unfold? Events, dear boy, events have a habit of surprising us. The first decade of the new millennium began with 9/11 followed by the war on terror and the Iraq War. As the late Marxist historian Eric Hobsbawm once wrote, the old century had not ended well. And that was before the biggest crisis since the Great Depression.

Milton Friedman – the father of neoliberalism – had believed in the purity of the free market. Things went wrong because government got in the way. If regulations were disbanded, the market would always correct itself, function smoothly and society would flourish. The financial crisis demonstrated this to be a fallacy.

Left unchecked, the financial sector almost brought down the entire edifice of global capitalism. In the memorable phrase of President George W Bush, at the height of the crisis, “this sucker could go down”. The resulting bailout of the financial sector was “socialism for the rich”, as Gore Vidal put it.

READ MORE
Six years on from the Arab Spring, revolution lingers in the air
100 years since the revolution, Russia is a capitalist utopia
Why Putin's torn on celebrating the anniversary of the Revolution

How unexpectedly brief the unipolar moment, the triumphal march, the victory lap was in the end. In this sense, Fukuyama could not have been more wrong about “the end of history”. Not because Islamist fundamentalism and authoritarianism pitted against liberalism indicates that the era of competing ideologies is far from over. No, because the marriage of free market economics and liberal democracy was incapable of producing a society benefiting the majority.

While Marx would not have recognised the social democratic model, he would be familiar with the direction we are headed in; namely the natural tendency of capitalism towards ever greater concentration of capital. Fukuyama had the misfortune to be writing at the end of the aberration that was the golden age of capitalism.

The financial crisis revealed the apparent bankruptcy of neoliberalism. But are the events of recent years – the Arab Spring convulsing the Middle East, the anti-establishment populist backlash both on the right and on the left – just the normal deviations in amplitude of every age? Or are these disruptions more extreme than normal?

If anyone had even dared to contemplate the collapse of capitalism at the height of the boom years they would have been laughed out of the room. Now the idea is really not so unthinkable. It is too early to say (as former Chinese premier Zhou Enlai supposedly declared of the French Revolution) if these are the first tremors of an impending earthquake or the harbingers of the coming apocalypse. One is reminded of Chekhov in The Cherry Orchard anticipating the pre-echoes of the Russian revolution. At the same time, one does not wish to sanctimoniously sound like a Cassandra heeding against the coming storm. Every generation whether Mayans, medievalists or Mormons has its doomsayers.

Progressive movements that have attempted democratic revolutions, such as the Egyptian uprising of 2011, have been brutally defeated by counter-revolutionary forces (Getty)
The financial crisis effectively bookended the era of neoliberalism and could even have spelled capitalism’s fall of the Berlin Wall moment. Much of the unexpected wave of global protest has been facilitated by the power of networks and social media, especially in repressive regimes. This thrillingly offers great potential for the protest movement as it finally catches up with modernity. Yet, as Neil Faulkner reminds me, peasant movements in 1520s Germany were using the printing press. “Click activism means bankers will be laughing all the way to the bank,” he says. “Class struggle is not virtual ... it is real in the workplace, on the campuses, on the estates, on the streets.”

It may all still be kicking off, according to many on the left; nevertheless these “coloured” revolutions have been neutralised. Shorn of traditional organisations that once gave the working class solidarity, a leaderless movement, without a vanguard and a clear political manifesto, has been dispersed all too easily time and again.

The anti-corporate movement of the 1990s, the Arab Spring and the Occupy movement have all been opposed to the status quo and, at the same time, lacking in a unified consensus on how to bring about change. A viable alternative programme for political and economic change with popular support has not been articulated – yet. As Tariq Ali puts it to me: “Every opposition – the Bolivarians in South America, Corbyn’s movement in Britain, Sanders in the US, Mélenchon in France, Podemos in Spain – has not challenged capitalism as such. Only its neo-liberal variant.”

READ MORE
Lenin knew that revolution wouldn't happen overnight
After the experimental failures of the 20th century, socialism remained discredited as a serious alternative. A refractory period ensued but socialism no longer appears to be a taboo subject. It was apparently the most-searched term in 2015. The intergenerational divide is stark with young people embracing a set of ideas that does not carry historical baggage for them.

Faulkner says: “World capitalism is in deep crisis, protracted crisis, a crisis to which the ruling classes of the world have no solution, and there are these vast evolving massive global problems, which are going to overwhelm unless we build radical movements for change. I’m not surprised people are searching the word ‘socialism’ online: people know we need an alternative. People are looking for an alternative.”

I ask about how these horizontalist movements compare vis a vis the verticalist hierarchical movements of the 20th century? Ali is scathing: they are “a dismal failure. Mass movements without politics wither away very rapidly even though their anniversaries are celebrated on the web. There is no substitute for politics.”

Grassroots popular movements, such as Momentum, are gaining ground through mass mobilisation (Getty)
With no consensus on how to bring about change. the vacuum is occupied by old certainties, however dysfunctional. Hence the expurgating death throes of neoliberalism, the resurgence of religious fundamentalism and the increasing popularity of the far right.

Cultural identity appears to have potentially superseded class identity as evidenced by the Brexit and Trump phenomena. This has been compounded by the dismantling of structures such as unions, political parties and mass media that enabled the working class to define its identity. What are the implications of this for the Marxist idea of the working class as the vehicle for revolution?

Tariq Ali replies: “The deindustrialisation of the US, Britain and other countries has also destroyed the traditional working class. Brexit, incidentally, was a scream against this and the oppressions of the neo-liberal system. New movements and new political organisations are emerging in which class barriers are more fluid that they once were. The levels of inequality under capitalism are at their peak, which creates possibilities for new models of opposing this system.”

The electoral success of Syriza in Greece demonstrated that mass mobilisation of popular movements is required to challenge global capital. Its crushing confirmed that even national solutions are not sufficient in the face of globalisation.

Faulkner says the Russian Revolution represented “a relatively small number of people, a few million people driving the revolutionary process”. “What if hundreds of millions of us were to take control of the modern global economy which is so rich and full of so much potential to satisfy needs, and run it from below democratically in keeping with human need?” he asks. “That is the great lesson of 1917: the potential that we as ordinary people have.” But he adds: “I don’t have any illusions about an international working-class revolution transforming the system. In a sense it’s the biggest ask in all of human history.”

At the end, Ali adds that China is “a billion-dollar question. A hugely successful, state-controlled capitalism without a trace of democracy; the largest proletariat in the world; a world power but, till now, with relatively low military spending.
In another two or three decades we will have a better idea as to where China is going.”


*(Ye Gods! If this is what he thinks of it now,what of the future? Comrade XI Gins ahs clearly spelt out where he and China are going,to take over the world...!))

The collapse of communism undermined the Marxist doctrine that it was a historical inevitability. Arch-capitalists would have us myopically believe that capitalism’s indomitability is also a historical inevitability. Not only had we arrived at the end of history but the grand narrative had been replaced by the fractals of chaos theory and deconstruction of postmodernism.

But if there is anything that history teaches us, it is this: the one inevitability is transformation. It is not a matter of whether capitalism will eventually give way to a new system but what will replace it. According to many on the left, we are on the cusp; or what the poet Robert Browning termed “the dangerous edge of things”. The historian Norman Davies once said that “historical change is like an avalanche. The starting point is a snow-covered mountainside that looks solid. All the changes take place under the surface and are invisible. But something is coming. What is impossible is to say when.”
Rakesh
Forum Moderator
Posts: 18274
Joined: 15 Jan 2004 12:31
Location: Planet Earth
Contact:

Re: Russia: News/Analysis/Discussion

Post by Rakesh »

China and Russia the Unequal, Unreal, Complex Relationship
https://airpowerasia.com/2020/09/07/chi ... ationship/
07 Sept 2020

By Air Marshal Anil Chopra (Retd)
Ambar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3173
Joined: 12 Jun 2010 09:56
Location: Weak meek unkil Sam!

Re: Russia: News/Analysis/Discussion

Post by Ambar »

Islamic terror attack on Russian university in the city of Perm. 6 confirmed dead, 8 injured.
Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4226
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: Russia: News/Analysis/Discussion

Post by Rudradev »

Any confirmation the shooter was an Islamist? That was the first thing I looked for but could not find any confirmation. In fact one source said that the shooter apparently denied having any religious or political ideology in a pre-shooting statement he had recorded.
Ambar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3173
Joined: 12 Jun 2010 09:56
Location: Weak meek unkil Sam!

Re: Russia: News/Analysis/Discussion

Post by Ambar »

https://abcnews.go.com/International/de ... d=80121722
Russian state media named the suspect as Timur Bekmansurov, an 18-year-old student studying law. An account with Bekmansurov's name on the Russian social media network VKontakte published a lengthy post shortly before the attack which describes fantasizing about carrying out a mass killing at a public place. In the post, the person wrote he has no religious or political motive and said he had dreamed of the killing "for years."
g.sarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4382
Joined: 09 Jul 2005 12:22
Location: MERCED, California

Re: Russia: News/Analysis/Discussion

Post by g.sarkar »

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-62736373
Gorbachev: Little love for late Soviet leader in Russia's old empire
Paul Kirby, BBC News, 31/08/2022

Mikhail Gorbachev was lionised by the West for lifting the Iron Curtain and ending the Cold War, but opinion is far more negative in Russia and much of its old communist empire.
One Russian state news agency commentator said he was proof that a leader's good intentions were capable of causing hell on earth for an entire country.
A friend and liberal media figure, Alexei Venediktov, said mournfully: "We've all been orphaned, just not everyone has realised it."
The Soviet Union's last leader may have given millions of people their freedom - but in his time in charge he still sent in troops to quell protests in the Baltic republics, Kazakhstan and the Caucasus.
And even though his mother had Ukrainian roots, Ukrainians never forgave him for supporting Russia's annexation of Crimea in 2014.
There was little love lost between Gorbachev and Russia's current leader Vladimir Putin, whose verdict on the fall of the Soviet empire as the "greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the [20th] Century" is well known.
......
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/31/europe/m ... -intl-hnk/
World leaders mourn death of last Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev
Jessie Yeung and Lianne Kolirin, CNN
August 31, 2022

The death of former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, known for his pivotal role in ending the Cold War and introducing key reforms to the USSR, has prompted an outpouring of condolences and tributes from world leaders.
Gorbachev died age 91 on Tuesday following a long illness, according to Russian state news agencies. He was the final leader of the Soviet Union, serving from 1985 until its collapse in 1991.
Russian President Vladimir Putin expressed his condolences and sent a message to Gorbachev's family and friends on Wednesday.
In an official letter published on the Kremlin's website, Putin expressed his "deepest condolences" to Gorbachev's relatives and friends, saying the former Soviet leader "had a huge impact on the course of world history."
He said Gorbachev led "our country during a period of complex, dramatic changes, large-scale foreign policy, and economic and social challenges," adding that "he deeply understood that reforms were necessary."
"I will especially note the great humanitarian, charitable, and educational activities that Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev has been conducting in recent years."
.......
Gautam
g.sarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4382
Joined: 09 Jul 2005 12:22
Location: MERCED, California

Re: Russia: News/Analysis/Discussion

Post by g.sarkar »

https://www.indiatoday.in/world/story/r ... 2022-09-15
Russian Prez Vladimir Putin survives assassination attempt: Report
Reports suggest that Russian President Vladimir Putin has survived an assassination attempt.
India Today Web Desk , New Delhi, September 15, 2022

Russian President Vladimir Putin has survived an assassination attempt, according to a report in EuroWeekly. According to the report, Putin escaped unharmed in the attack, and a number of arrests have been made.
While the media remains tightly censored in Russia, there is no clarity on when the assassination bid took place. However, a number of arrests have been made. EuroWeekly further reported that Putin was traveling in a decoy motorcade with growing fears for his safety.
The left front wheel of Putin’s car was hit by a loud bang, according to the report.
.....
Gautam
rsingh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4451
Joined: 19 Jan 2005 01:05
Location: Pindi
Contact:

Re: Russia: News/Analysis/Discussion

Post by rsingh »

Yep.And Zee news have no knowledge of FSB....they still shouting KGB :P
Cyrano
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5481
Joined: 28 Mar 2020 01:07

Re: Russia: News/Analysis/Discussion

Post by Cyrano »

Reported no where else ...
sanman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2304
Joined: 22 Mar 2023 11:02

Re: Russia: News/Analysis/Discussion

Post by sanman »

sanman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2304
Joined: 22 Mar 2023 11:02

Re: Russia: News/Analysis/Discussion

Post by sanman »

sanman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2304
Joined: 22 Mar 2023 11:02

Re: Russia: News/Analysis/Discussion

Post by sanman »

Post Reply